1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) Of the first floor of the building listed in the attached list, each of the specifications A, B, C, D, and A in the attached list.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 6, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff on the lease of 14 square meters of the part inside the ship (hereinafter “instant building”) which successively connects each point of the attached Table No. 1, B, C, D, and A among the first floor of the building listed in the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with the Plaintiff, without a lease deposit, for a monthly rent of 250,000 won, and for a period from February 6, 2015 to December 12, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). At that time, the Defendant occupied and used the instant building by delivery from the Plaintiff.
B. The instant lease agreement was implicitly renewed, and the Defendant did not pay a monthly rent after October 7, 2017. As such, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of overdue rent for at least two months by serving a written complaint in the instant case.
C. As of January 31, 2018, the Defendant’s delayed public charges are KRW 230,090, and the Defendant’s overdue rent is KRW 1,518,140 as of July 6, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above fact-finding, the lease contract of this case was terminated on February 28, 2018, on the record that the copy of the complaint of this case was served on the defendant according to the plaintiff's declaration of termination. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent of 1,748,230 won (230,090 won, 518,140 won, 250,000 won and monthly rent of 230,090 won and the monthly rent of 1,518,140 won (230,518,140 won) and the monthly rent of this case from July 7, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.